Judge to rule on pipeline land-taking

By Dan Wallach

Updated 9:14 pm, Wednesday, September 12, 2012

BEAUMONT — Representatives for TransCanada's Keystone XL pipeline asked a Jefferson County judge Wednesday for an order to allow the company access to land it wants as part of a pipeline route, but Court-at-Law Judge Tom Rugg says he won't rule until Sept. 24.

Rugg's court decides cases where one party — in this case, TransCanada — wants to force property owners to grant access to their land under eminent domain laws.

Taking private property to help oil and gas development has been part of Texas law since 1899. Landowners always have had the right to oppose the taking of their property, but the Legislature has made it easier over the years for pipeline companies to cross private property.

Most Popular

TransCanada sued some Jefferson County property owners for that right, and the company wants Rugg to issue what's called a writ of possession.

One of the defendants, David C. Holland, owns 4,000 acres south of Beaumont. TransCanada wants to cross his property by acquiring more than 9,200 linear feet through it. Holland said the company is bullying him into accepting what he considers inadequate compensation and inadequate protection for the groundwater on the land used for raising cattle.

In comments before the hearing, Holland said the proposed line would make a hayfield useless for the next four years.

Plenty of pipelines cross his property now, he said. But the Keystone line would create what he's been told would be an “invisible barrier” that could not be crossed with heavy equipment used in farming, which is a restriction not imposed by other pipelines, he said.

Holland said he doesn't oppose Keystone's line, which would carry crude oil from tar sands in Canada's northwest. He does oppose TransCanada's lack of what he considers adequate environmental protection and a “lowball” compensation offer, which he said would put him $30,000 in the hole.

A handful of opponents to the Keystone pipeline demonstrated in front of the Jefferson County Courthouse before the hearing.

TransCanada must apply for a new permit for the Keystone XL line from Canada into the United States because the Obama administration rejected the original application. Its route through sensitive land in Nebraska was judged too close to a major underground aquifer.

The company is forging ahead with the part of the line from Southeast Texas to a major oil hub in Cushing, Okla. That does not need a federal permit as it doesn't cross an international boundary.

Tom Zabel, a Houston attorney appearing for TransCanada, argued his client had satisfied the requirements for a writ of possession and should be given authority to proceed. “You can't use other arguments to invalidate the writ,” he told Rugg.

Rice farmer Bill Dishman, whose property would be affected by TransCanada, said the company would use a road he needs to access the northern part of his property, a 60-acre tract, denying him use of the road that connects to that piece of property.

“It would be a big impact,” he said after the hearing. Neither Dishman nor Holland testified during the 90-minute hearing.

Rugg ordered the attorneys to file written arguments by Sept. 21 on whether his court has the jurisdiction to issue the writ of possession TransCanada seeks.